Inventor Carolyn Hafeman is appealing PTAB decisions that invalidated her device location and theft prevention patents, which were challenged by Google, LG, and Microsoft. In a letter to the CAFC, she argues that the USPTO's reinstatement of procedures for discretionary denial raises questions about the validity of IPR decisions in her case. LG had filed a stipulation to prevent dismissal of IPR petitions, but Hafeman contends LG violated this post-institution, leading to invalid IPR decisions. The implications of these violations are central to her appeal to the CAFC.
...Hafeman is not challenging the PTAB's application of the six-factor Fintiv analysis at institution, but rather, the PTAB's failure to address or enforce a violated Sotera stipulation post-institution.
Hafeman asserted her patents in U.S. district court against LG Electronics in 2021, and Google and Microsoft subsequently filed a series of six IPR petitions at the PTAB, identifying LG Electronics as a real party-in-interest in the petitions.
The PTAB entered final written decisions invalidating all claims of Hafeman's challenged patents in January 2024, three months before the Western District of Texas found that LG violated its stipulation and was estopped from challenging the priority date of Hafeman's patent claims in that action.
In her CAFC appeal, Hafeman argued that the Board's reliance on LG's stipulation while ignoring its violation undermines the validity of the IPR decisions.
Collection
[
|
...
]